Monday, December 15, 2014

There’s a reason why you’ve never seen a Canon 7D review on this blog – I thought the sensor on that camera was complete garbage. Now, the 7D wasn’t all bad as it was a very nice camera body with the best AF system I had seen from Canon – at the time it had been released. However, I spent time doing my first bookshelf shots with that camera and was so underwhelmed by what I saw that I didn’t think it was worth losing sleep (during my 11:00 PM – 4:00 AM blogging hours back then) to write an article about it.

To all my readers who purchased 7D’s, I apologize for letting you down by not publishing a review. I vowed not to make that same mistake again, so I made sure that I would get a Canon 7D Mark II to review this time – no matter if it was good or bad.

Like the original 7D, the 7D Mark II sounds brilliant on paper. In fact, I thought the 70D was a decent camera, so I thought that if we had a 70D sensor in an improved 7D body that it would be a camera that is easy to recommend. However, what you get in some ways is better than that, yet some ways it is worse.

The 7D Mark II is basically a 70D variant living in what most closely resembles a 5D Mark III body and it differentiates itself from the two with a new menu font that I actually quite enjoyed. The net result is that 5D Mark III users will feel right at home, but enjoy LCD text that is much easier to read display (not that the previous one was bad). From there you get a whopping 10fps, a pop up flash, a built-in GPS and the first dual DIGIC 6 processors. This had me thinking that I might even want to replace my 5D Mark III because it sounded like the dream camera – on paper.

Sadly boys and girls, cameras aren’t just about body features and technical specifications. At the end of the day what matters the most to me is the accuracy of the auto focus system and the quality of the images produced. This is sadly where the 7D Mark II falls flat on its face to create images that perhaps suck less than the original 7D, but not by much. I also feel that the image quality of the 7D Mark II is one of, if not the worst of any DSLR in Canon’s current line up. In fact, I honestly preferred the T5i image quality over the 7D Mark II.

One of my friends used the analogy that if the 7D was stomach flu then the 7D Mark II was diarrhea. Sure the later is less of two evils, but you don’t really want either. Honestly, I couldn’t have put it better myself!

Now if you thought the 50D, 60D or 7D was a good camera then you’ll love the 7D Mark II. However, if you are like me and thought they weren’t worth owning if someone gave you one for free, then I have to advise that you stay away from the 7D Mark II – despite how fantastic the body features and technical specifications are.

Bookshelf Testing

If you go see my reviews for the T5i and 70D, you’ll see why I’m so disappointed with the image quality of this camera when its siblings were pretty decent.

Click the images below to see a full-size in-camera JPEG taken with camera default settings plus mirror lockup and a timer. The camera was on a tripod, so this is as good as it gets. At first the ISO 100 results look fantastic so I thought I was going to be amazed, after ISO 800 things start to glide down hill with things getting downright ugly by ISO 6400 – by today’s standards.

After ISO 6400 the images become basically unusable in my opinion which is sad for a sports camera. Sports demands higher shutter speeds and the only way you get action freezing shutter speeds on overcast soccer fields and dark gymnasiums is by trusting that your highest ISO’s will give you a great image. The Nikon D3 paved a new road as to what was possible and great cameras like the Nikon D4s and Canon 1D X continue that tradition. Sadly a used Nikon D700 would outperform this lousy sensor.

To be fair, if you’ll only be viewing small images as shown in this article or you’ll only be using a high resolution display (i.e., a 4K UHD display) then you’ll have no clue of the suckage that exists when you view the image at 100% on a traditional 1080p display.

f/2.8 @ 70 mm, 1/250, ISO 5000, No FlashAt first glance this one isn’t too bad (once you get past the lady who jumped in my frame to take a shot). However at 100% you start to see a lot of detail lost. What isn’t shown though are the dozens of shots before and after this that were all blurry.

f/4 @ 44 mm, 1/250, ISO 5000, No FlashThis is one of the very few action shots that came out during my one hour of shooting in the freezing cold.This is representative of the best quality sports photographers can expect in less than perfect light conditions.

Conclusion

If you swapped the sensor in this camera with a 6D it would destroy the sales of the 1D X, because the body is excellent. However, the sensor seemed to be worse than the 70D when on paper it seems like it should be just as good or better (thanks to DIGIC 6). This would imply that DIGIC 6 isn’t quite perfected yet, so expect lots of firmware updates on this one to make it suck less.

My advice to those who must buy this camera despite my warnings is to turn OFF all noise reduction and let Noiseware do the job instead – it’ll give the best possible image you can get from this camera. I’d also advise showing your image small on high resolution devices like UHD and Retina displays – it helps to hide the poor ISO performance. When you do that you think it isn’t that bad!

Ultimately I can’t recommend this camera. Canon sports shooters with a big lens investment would be better served investing in a used 1D Mark IV which will outperform this camera both in terms of image quality and performance, and everyone else should consider a D750 (or a D4s if you can afford it). Sure you’ll get less frames per second on the Nikon, but nearly all of them will be in focus and you’ll have killer image quality too!

24 comments:

Thank you so much for this review. I was thinking about buying this camera - I won't. I too purchased the original 7D new and only kept it for about 3 weeks - it's IQ was so awful. I keep reading all the other reviews on this new version of the 7D camera and they talk about the body, the build, the ergonomics and then say well the IQ is not so good - but it's a great camera - "W" "T" -- you know what. I really appreciate your willingness to tell it like it is and to remember it is really at the end of the day all about the image the camera makes.

I though the same until I calibrated my lens with 7D2. Initially all my wide angle shots were out of focus/front focus but after adjusting (micro adjust), my shots were in focus. My advice is cal check all you lens before writing the 7D2 off.

I've found the opposite to be true. After using both the 7D and 70D, the 7D MkII is a godsend, especially at high ISO (I'm almost always above 800 shooting wildlife). The noise above 3200 blows the D7100 out of the water, and it has much less chroma noise than the 70D at higher ISO. About the only thing I'd pick at D7100 over the 7DII (or 70D) is the DR.

I've made great prints from the 7DII at 12800 ISO (8x12) and know others who have had full-page magazine spreads at 3200 ISO. To say it's not usable at 6400 is utter nonsense.

And of course the D700 would have better image quality - it's a full-frame sensor.

Coming from a A-1 to a 30D to a 7D to a 5DIII, I am having a hard time drinking the 7DII kool-aid that is being pushed. I am very happy having a full frame camera. I do believe there is a place for crop sensor cameras though.

When Canon was starting to manufacture the 7DII, they were engineering in the new Rebel T6.

Canon releases the 7DII with basically the same sensor the 70D was realeased with three years ago. But now the Rebel T6 is coming out with a 24.2 megapixel sensor. WTH? Granted the Rebel will not have high speed FPS, the same Auto Focus, but it gets a brand spanking new sensor over the 7DII?

As much as I would like to have a crop sensor camera, like the 7DII, for sports and wildlife and the extra reach, I am passing on it. I will get a second camera by the end of this year, but not the 7DII.

Alex, I'm not sure what you what mean that I soften my images in the context of this article because these are all straight out of the camera with no Photoshop. No photo in this article (except for the camera photo linked to B&H) has been modified from the way it came out of the camera - click for the originals.

Yes, I have shot with Velvia and other films.

I'm not quite sure why you are so upset because I'm sharing my opinion based on what I see using this camera in everyday situations like a typical consumer would. I test a lot of gear for B&H so I have an extensive history with a lot of digital cameras.

My complaint with this particular one is that its images are indeed soft compared to others that I've tested - including others from Canon

I am rather confused, as some other posters are, how you came to the conclusion that this camera's ISO is better than the 70D? The 7DII has a completely new sensor compared to that in the 70D, even though they have the same resolution.

Also; I'm not exactly sure why you included a shot of onion-ringed bokeh and called that phenomenon out in the caption, since that is determinate of the quality of a lens, and not of a camera's sensor.

I mean, if you think this ISO performance is bad, I assume you also disliked the 1D Mark IV, one of the most popular sports camera in recent memory, which has very comparable performance at a resolution of 16 MP vs. 20 MP.

As someone who's worked with the photography staffs of newspapers and magazine publishers, the last thing people care about in a photo of Peyton Manning is how it looks at 100%, since most sports photos are downsized approximately 90% anyways.

I'm trying to understand your reasoning about why this camera is unusable at ISOs that have been used by professionals with older and worse cameras.

The 7DII is not a golden bullet. It has its issues such as how finicky its AF system is, but I get the impression that you went into this review hoping that the 7DII was lackluster, which makes me question how informed this review really is.

I came to my conclusion using my eyes with comparable bookshelf shots - not tech specs or marketing data.

I still own my 1D Mark IV and like it, but tech has improved so the 1DX is my primary camera now.

Your point about downsizing is perfectly valid and if my review were about real world scenarios I'd completely agree with that comment. In fact, most of what I point out wouldn't be an issue in print or web size images, but that's not what people come here for. They are here to read my opinion about the quality of the camera overall based on the couple dozen cameras I review each year.

I work with many pros myself - including pulitzer prize winning photographers - and the opinion on what's acceptable noise isn't universal. I've worked with pros that wouldn't dare go above 1600 on a 5D Mark III when I consider that camera totally usable up to 12,800. To each his own.

Your last comment is way off base. Think about it - if I write a glowing review and you buy the camera I make a commission. It is in my personal best interest to say everything is great and do everything I can to encourage you to buy - which is what other sites too. The reason why my site has succeeded despite being pretty ugly (because I blog when I should be sleeping) is because I'm sharing my honest opinion of what I see based on my experience reviewing some of the best cameras on the market by Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fujifilm, and more.

If you like this camera then who cares what I say? Get it. I can tell you though that if I were spending my money I'd pass on it as there are better offerings on the market right now based on units I've held in my hands and shot under real world scenarios. My regular readers value this reality about my reviews because I'm not afraid to follow the sheep and say everything is great because that's what makes a site more money. I'm willing to lose money and speak the truth as I see it based on actually using the gear, but at the end of the say it is just my opinion. Others are free to disagree and you hold the ultimate power in deciding where you spend your dollars.

It sounds as if you've made up your mind that the 7D Mark II is a great camera and you are looking for validation of what you wish to be true, but I'm sorry I can't provide that based on what I saw. The good news is that it's not a bad camera by any means, so you'll enjoy your purchase and get good shots with it so enjoy your new 7D Mark II. I'm certain when you pair it with some of Canon's great new lenses it will serve you very well.

I bought my 7D Mark II a few months ago for wildlife photography. I normally shoot with my Canon 1DX, but wanted the extra reach from the 7D sensor. From my experience, I would agree with the review that the image quality from the 7D Mark II is poor. When I look at my calibrated 7D Mark II images alongside the 1DX, I generally conclude it was a waste of time even using the 7D Mark II. Fortunately, I can sell it without too much loss whilst the shutter actuations are low. If I was in the market, I would strongly encourage buyers to think twice about buying a Canon 7D Mark II. I should also say I found the 7D Mark II very noisy above 1600 ISO. Consider a Nikon or 1DX if you can afford it would be my advice. Wish I could comment positively on the 7D, but my experiences have been pretty disappointing.

I wish I could disagree with you on this but having recently purchased a 7d ii for bird photography to replace my 6d I have been horribly disappointed. Im not lieing when I feel my wife's T3i images look much cleaner and with more detail than my new 7d. I want to love the camera but the IQ is just so bad. I wish there was a solution.

I purchased a refurbished one over a month ago and sent it back. AF was inconsistent and images were all soft and noisy (even at ISO 800). Decided I must have had a reject and waited for a holiday deal on a new one.

Got one two weeks ago - Adorama had a deal on Thanksgiving Day. I am even less impressed with its performance than my original 7D classic (which collects dust and acts solely as a back up to my 5D III). I end up renting additional 5D III or 1 series bodies when I have paid jobs because I don't want to rely on the 7D's lack of image quality as a backup.

I am returning this second 7D2 to Adorama.

There is a reason why both B&H and Adorama have, for well over a week now had $1,040 (after rebate) kit deals for it along with the PRO-100 printer – and they both still have the kit deals in-stock!!! Only one explanation – so much inventory because the camera since launch was a dud…

Makes me want to sell some lenses I am not using along with my 7D classic and just get a pre-owned 1D IV or (I wish) a 1DX...

Yup, unfortunatly, all the hype does not stack up, ive just bought a 7d 2 3 weeks ago, i was sold on the reports of the amazing autofocus system , and the high iso performance for a crop sensor. I normally shoot with a 6d and wanted the extra reach and FPS for BIF photography, What ive found in this short time is this, the autofocus is decent, but certainly not to the standard that canon claim, and it is finicky, set it up for one type of bird and clear sky background, then you get a bird flying low with a cluttered background, be preperred to miss the shot and go back to the settings. But most of all, i find the image quality HORRIBLE, soft, washed out colours, lacking in detail, and extremely noisy above 1600 ISO. In fact 800 iso for me would probably be a cut of point, so bearing in mind i live in northumberland in the UK, and the winters are dark, and the days short, its just not worth taking this camera out of the bag on a dull day when its paired with my sigma 150-600 c. My advice, look elswhere, in fact if canon cant improve sensor quality, i think this will be their last premium aps-c sensor body, I think the future could be ultra high megapixel full frame sensors, which will have excellent cropping capabilities, I know normally this would mean more noise produced, but the sony a7rii has excellent noise high ISO performance, so it can be done!!!!!!!!!!

Had mine 3 weeks, the image quality is really bad, i will be selling asap, and sticking to full frame, id rather spend the money on renting lenses for birding, than produce crap images on a daily basis!!

Ron, your review seems a bit harsh, but it is the truth. I purchased a 7D Mk II and ohh boy! I regret that move. All images taken at ISO 1600 and beyond are not usable. The workaround is to overexpose each time I have to be at 1600+ so that I get less noise and can fix exposure in post. Images are also soft. Total disappointment

I feel that you've either got a really bad copy of the 7D Mark II, or you have very high standards for image quality. If you expose properly, the original 7D's images are easily useable to ISO3200. Now, Canon did actually ship quite a few 7D Mark II bodies that did have actual focusing problems, and soft images. Possibly yours is one of these, and you need to replace it. Most other reviews I have read are proving the Mark II is a brilliant camera.

JPEGs are also not a good representation of image quality, as the camera's default settings include Noise Reduction, which obviously softens the images. Again, blurry shots are 95% the fault of the lens or settings, not the camera/sensor. I do see you have an awesome lens; maybe you should try microadjusting the lens to work perfectly with this camera.

I also don't see why you'd be commenting on the out-of-focus bokeh in one of your sample images; that is the lens, not the camera.

It would be cool if you could get a second copy in and test it as well, so you have two samples.

I appreciate your candor regarding the Canon 7D Mark II.However, I must also point out some discrepancies :

- It's not an apples-to-apples comparison when you compare the 7DM2 to any recent full-frame sensor DSLR. At the end of the day, no manufacturer is going to change the laws of physics. Full-frame sensors will be better the APS-C sensors, period.

- Which brings us to the second point. Your comments regarding the direct competitor to the 7DM2, the Nikon D7200. In the "Compared To..." section, I quote :

"Image quality-wise, I find the 7D Mark II to be better than I expected before this review. I figured the D7200 would destroy the 7D Mark II but upon close examination the differences between the two favor the 7D Mark II – but it comes at a $500 premium!"

Given your high opinions of the Nikon D7200 / D7100 / D7000 series, would you still NOT recommend the 7DM2 ?

Read the other comments here from actual users who bought 7DM2's and then validated my findings.

One of the reasons my blog has done so well is because people know that I'll give my honest opinion despite what the mainstream and fanboys are saying. I have zero incentive to get people to like a camera that I wouldn't buy myself, but I could say it's awesome and earn a commision for you purchasing it. It's basically self defeating to my business model to say anything bad about anything, which is why many other sites don't do that.

The 7D Mark II is a very user friendly camera body, but I'm very disappointed with the sensor as many other cameras that I've tested have given me results that I think are more inline with what I find acceptable.

If you are convinced I'm wrong, then by all means get a 7D Mark II. If you don't pixel peep and just use it, then you'll be very happy and that's the most important thing. You can also make wonderful photos with it as photography is less about the gear and all about the content and composure of your images.

Thank you for this wonderful review. I'm actually in a dilemma now to choose Canon 7D Mark2 and any help would be appreciated.

Photography is just my hobby and my interest is into Brid photography, and love taking pics of my 2 year old son.

Considering my usage, I don't want to invest too much, let's say a budget of around $3500 including both body and lens. In this case which DSLR would you suggest? Is Nikon D7200 image quality on par or at least close to Nikon D750?

Will the D750 paired with Nikon 200-500 work for my need or D7200 with 200-500? Also, what do you think about Nikon D7200 vs 7d Mark2?

Although I very much like the FF sensor for its image quality, I'm afraid I will loose the reach of a cropped sensors.

The 7D Mark II is a good camera body with a camera sensor that just lags behind better offerings for this price point these days.

Based on your needs, I think the D7200 would be a better choice if you want to maximize your value but you'd appreciate the superior image quality of the D750 if you have the extra funds to go that route.

While it is true that the cropped sensor will give you more reach for bird photography, a high quality image file that has been cropped can easily be resized with Perfect Resize 10 or greater to easily take away that advantage. What's more when photographing your child you'll appreciate the better bokeh you'll get from the larger sensor of the D750.

I'm a Canon shooter and love my fast focusing Canon lenses, but when it comes to camera bodies in this price range Nikon currently has the better offering so you are right to skip the 7DM2 and consider either the D7200 or D750.

Another disappointed 7DII owner here. I wish I'd done more research before buying it. I don't know how many bird shots I have with unacceptable noise in dark feathers. Something else I don't think has been mentioned that REALLY pisses me off is that in manual mode, there is no exposure level indicator on the bottom of the viewfinder. It's there in Av, Tv, and P, so WTF? If you wear glasses and the sun is coming at you from the right, it's almost impossible to see that puny vertical guide on the right side of the viewfinder. Ron, do you have any idea why Canon did this?

The indicator on the bottom isn't actually the meter (which Canon calls exposure level indicator), but instead it's the exposure compensation indicator (see page 226 http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/5/0300016615/02/eos7d-mk2-im2-en.pdf) whereas the right is the exposure level indicator. Since the 7D Mark II doesn't support exposure compensation in manual mode (unlike the 1DX with the latest firmware which does - when you are using Auto ISO only), there is no need to show that indicator.

When shooting in P, S, & Av the camera will automatically adjust the corresponding settings (and ISO if using Auto ISO) to get an accurate exposure that also reflects any exposure compensation adjustments you've dialed in (as indicated on the bottom of the viewfinder).

I agree it's a little tricky to see on the right side, and it's actually even worse once you have a flash attached because they also indicate the flash exposure compensation on that same indicator on the right which makes it even more tricky to see what's what.

With respect to your comment about noise - I'd agree. As I mentioned in my review, it really irritates me how much they've overworked this sensor for the sake of more megapixels as the high noise image quality suffers. Despite being a Canon shooter, I find myself recommending the D7200 over the 7DM2 simply because - to my eyes in real world usage - I find the D7200 does a much better job with keeping the noise at control (assuming a D500 isn't the budget).

I get a lot of heat - especially from fanboys - when I do my reviews because I don't validate all of the hype the other sites publish to encourage you to buy gear (because that's how we all make money blogging), and my "say it like it is" actually hurts my ability to get a return on my time investment for blogging. However, I appreciate comments like yours that back up what I was saying as I think it helps to build what I care about the most - credibility.

Canon has taken a great camera body with the 7D Mark I & II and just put a very underwhelming sensor in it, and it couldn't be more frustrating to me - and the people who put their hard earned money into buying those products. I try to warn about this reality for this camera - and others - in the hopes that Canon and other camera makers will take the feedback to improve their products in the future. They make great cameras, and some of the best lenses in the business (in my opinion) so it's a shame that if you really want great performance for wildlife your only practical offering from Canon is the very expensive 1DX series body.

Gotta say I haven't been impressed with my newly bought 7d mk ii either.It focuses inconsistently, sometimes front sometimes back and the IQ is soft lacking any real detail. Colors are also washed out and unattractive.My canon 100d IQ takes the 7d mk ii to the cleaners.I've returned it to cannon for review / repair and eagerly await their findings.

I got it back from canon service and the auto focus consistency has improved significantly. There's also been a marked improvement in sharpness and colors.They said the af system needed calibration and a reset was required on the cmos chip.All in all I'm happy with the results.